Poll of the Day > Rate that thing ~ Day 1762 ~ Assault Rifles

(+) Yeah! (+)

Day 1754: Facial Hair - 5.8 (29 votes)
Day 1755: Flannel Jackets - 6.0 (12 votes)
Day 1756: Skateboarding - 6.4 (20 votes)
Day 1757: Halloween - 8.7 (22 votes)
Day 1758: GameFAQs - 6.8 (37 votes)
Day 1759: Arm Wrestling - 6.2 (17 votes)
Day 1760: Sunglasses - 8.1 (18 votes)
Day 1761: Firepit - 6.2 (7 votes)

inb4 people who hate the Second Amendment and think that it's somehow possible to ban guns in this country.
---

The results are exactly what I expected them to be. Either "I'm sick of these gun fetishists already" or "murricuh!" and nothing in between lol
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRJLdAUBR6w" data-time="

Syntheticon posted...

The results are exactly what I expected them to be. Either "I'm sick of these gun fetishists already" or "murricuh!" and nothing in between lol

I'm the only 9/10 so far. Honestly, they're fucking awesome.
---

Solid 8/10, not quite a battle rifle.
---

Never used one outside of a video game so I dunno
---

Don't exist
---

Metal_Mario99 posted...

inb4 people who hate the Second Amendment and think that it's somehow possible to ban guns in this country.

>acting like it isn't possible

The definition of "assault rifle" includes selectable fire. Fully automatic weapons are illegal in the US without a Federal Firearms License. What most people like to call "assault rifles" are just hunting rifles styled like military weapons. So, sure, 10/10, military weapons for the military. Why not?
---

GanglyKhan posted...

Metal_Mario99 posted...

inb4 people who hate the Second Amendment and think that it's somehow possible to ban guns in this country.

>acting like it isn't possible

It isn't.
---

5.

Ive never used an assault rifle so I dont have any experience with them.

I dont believe they should be allowed by people that dont have a legitimate reason to own them aside from the second amendment, such as military and advanced tactical forces. I believe people who currently own and wish to own assault rifles should be mentally and psychologically evaluated since its a piece of equipment with dangerous consequences if used incorrectly and/or illegally.

But Im also not going to whine and stomp my feet because the wrong people own them.

Metal_Mario99 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

Metal_Mario99 posted...

inb4 people who hate the Second Amendment and think that it's somehow possible to ban guns in this country.

>acting like it isn't possible

It isn't.

Why not? Are you saying that because of public opinion or because it's an Amendment? Or for some other reason?

GanglyKhan posted...

Metal_Mario99 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

Metal_Mario99 posted...

inb4 people who hate the Second Amendment and think that it's somehow possible to ban guns in this country.

>acting like it isn't possible

It isn't.

Why not? Are you saying that because of public opinion or because it's an Amendment? Or for some other reason?

For those two reasons, and also because we're just a little bit bigger than and more populous than, say, Australia. Good luck going door to door through every town in the country to confiscate weapons, because that's exactly what you'd have to do.
---

What kind of assault rifle are we talking about, TC? A legitimate select-fire rifle or just a scary-looking semi-automatic that politicians love to screech about?
---

GanglyKhan posted...

Metal_Mario99 posted...

inb4 people who hate the Second Amendment and think that it's somehow possible to ban guns in this country.

>acting like it isn't possible

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSANTRnEBgg" data-time="
---

dancer62 posted...

The definition of "assault rifle" includes selectable fire. Fully automatic weapons are illegal in the US without a Federal Firearms License. What most people like to call "assault rifles" are just hunting rifles styled like military weapons. So, sure, 10/10, military weapons for the military. Why not?

Because for all practical purposes they meet the definition for an assault rifle when the one distinguishing characteristic is rarely, if ever, used even in a combat environment. I was bitched at for using burst fire on a range in the army. Why? Because youre not gonna hit a damn thing.

No they "meet" the definition that was chosen specifically to fit a narrative. Assault sounds scary, thus specifically chosen to drive certain emotions and sympathy to attempt to mislead and misinform.
---

Amuseum posted...

No they "meet" the definition that was chosen specifically to fit a narrative. Assault sounds scary, thus specifically chosen to drive certain emotions and sympathy to attempt to mislead and misinform.

Whats your point? Theyre effectively assault rifles. You can do with that whatever you want. As a soldier I used one, and as a civilian I own one. but I dont act like theyre not essentially the same thing when youd be hard presssed to find someone whos ever actually used that magical burst/full-auto in a firefight.

And the government can pass legislation with whatever jargon people will buy into. What the DoD considers an assault rifle is not what the federal government considers an assault weapon

Also, it looks like I completely ignored your dumbass argument that 'assault' is apparently some new term assigned to the rifle after people started using them to shoot up schools and country concerts. Maybe it had a basis back when a purpose-driven weapon was being described and looked for.

WastelandCowboy posted...

I believe people who currently own and wish to own assault rifles should be mentally and psychologically evaluated since its a piece of equipment with dangerous consequences if used incorrectly and/or illegally.

That applies to basically any hard object tho
---

dancer62 posted...

The definition of "assault rifle" includes selectable fire. Fully automatic weapons are illegal in the US without a Federal Firearms License. What most people like to call "assault rifles" are just hunting rifles styled like military weapons. So, sure, 10/10, military weapons for the military. Why not?

You don't need a ffl to own an assault rifle, or fully automatic weapon. You just need a big stack of cash to buy the gun you want and to be approved for the tax stamp to transfer it over to your ownership. If you're going the ffl + class 3 license route, you can get newer full auto weapons, but it's a huge hassle and a lot of upkeep.
---

dragon504 posted...

You just need a big stack of cash to buy the gun you want and to be approved for the tax stamp to transfer it over to your ownership.

It's never approved tho
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

dragon504 posted...

You just need a big stack of cash to buy the gun you want and to be approved for the tax stamp to transfer it over to your ownership.

It's never approved tho

Ive literally been shooting a suppressed rifle from my buddys garage from a suppressor he bought legally. Tax stamps get approved all the time. Theyre just expensive and take forever. But you dont live here so how the fuck would you know

CacciatoPart3 posted...

Ive literally been shooting a suppressed rifle from my buddys garage from a suppressor he bought legally. Tax stamps get approved all the time. Theyre just expensive and take forever. But you dont live here so how the fuck would you know

Because approval for suppressors is totally the same as approval for automatics lol
---

Lol i forgot you spend a lot of time here in America lol

CacciatoPart3 posted...

Lol i forgot you spend a lot of time here in America lol

Tell me about your approved tax stamps for automatics, you know since you seem to believe 1st hand is absolutely necessary.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

CacciatoPart3 posted...

Lol i forgot you spend a lot of time here in America lol

Tell me about your approved tax stamps for automatics, you know since you seem to believe 1st hand is absolutely necessary.

The tax stamp process for suppressors is the same for automatics. Fill out the appropriate NFA form, send the money with it, get the the item in question engraved with your info, wait 9-12 months, BAM you got your tax stamp.
---

XlaxJynx007 posted...

The tax stamp process for suppressors is the same for automatics. Fill out the appropriate NFA form, send the money with it, get the the item in question engraved with your info, wait 9-12 months, BAM you got your tax stamp.

The process is the same, the result is different.
---

Like he said, its the same damn form and process. Youre just going to have a lot less paperwork getting filed for a full auto when they cost 15 times the price of a suppressor.

I have no idea how someone who doesnt even live here is constantly so confident and eventually wrong about shit going on in a country they dont even live in.

CacciatoPart3 posted...

Like he said, its the same damn form and process. Youre just going to have a lot less paperwork getting filed for a full auto when they cost 15 times the price of a suppressor.

It's the same form for filing your taxes, but one situation gets you paid and one gets you charged. Same process, different result.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

CacciatoPart3 posted...

Like he said, its the same damn form and process. Youre just going to have a lot less paperwork getting filed for a full auto when they cost 15 times the price of a suppressor.

It's the same form for filing your taxes, but one situation gets you paid and one gets you charged. Same process, different result.

Thats a terrible analogy.

Metal_Mario99 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

Metal_Mario99 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

Metal_Mario99 posted...

inb4 people who hate the Second Amendment and think that it's somehow possible to ban guns in this country.

>acting like it isn't possible

It isn't.

Why not? Are you saying that because of public opinion or because it's an Amendment? Or for some other reason?

For those two reasons, and also because we're just a little bit bigger than and more populous than, say, Australia. Good luck going door to door through every town in the country to confiscate weapons, because that's exactly what you'd have to do.

It's entirely possible, it's just unlikely because the wrong people are keeping the necessary ones paid-the majority of public opinion doesn't match the current legislation and that's not how government is supposed to work. It's right there in the name 'amendment'- it's something changed after it was first created and there's no legal reason they couldn't do it again. The original wording of the amendment has been taken grossly out of context when it suits gun fanatics, but every group does that to suit their own narrative from time to time so you can't really hold that against them.
The flaw with your argument about Australia is that it was largely a voluntary exercise to bring in unregistered guns/types of guns that were deemed unnecessary (the gun amnesty was actually repeated again in 2017 and still had plenty of community support) after the worst mass shooting to date because the public collectively agreed that you can't stop unstable people from killing but you also can't argue with the numbers-less guns in the population, less gun violence. The UK has had a similar level of success with their buy back scheme and gun violence there has also nearly dropped off entirely since.
You can say that you want your guns (and that's cool, nobody can argue with personal preferences, provided it is done safely) but based on the stats, you can't justify that you need your more serious types of guns. If the more hardcore gun owners can make their peace with that we just might make some progress on this but instead you all just become more numb to the increasing rate of gun related violence and fatalities.
---